(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Poland Russia and Great Britain 1941-1945"

upon them ... the Gestapo and the N.K.V.D., die only with the
regime which spawned them. It is now an agreed precept that the
United States has had a beneficial influence on the national States in the
western hemisphere by reason of its policy of non-intervention, leaving
its sister republics free to work out their problems in their own way.
The American Continent attained its unity without any great struggle,
and was able to develop the common ideals of democracy under the
protecting shadow of the United States. A similar development was
achieved in Great Britain, whose more advanced colonies had achieved
complete independence. Ireland was the most convincing instance of
England's policy of non-intervention—the Irish Free State had refused
to enter the war5 and although its assistance had seemed of the greatest
value to Britain she did not violate its neutrality, nor compel that State
to wage a war against Germany—a complete contrast to Soviet Russia,
who had occupied the Baltic States " in order to prevent them becoming
German bases," an aggression which in the first instance had been
undertaken with the understanding of Germany.
Russia, governed by an entirely different set of rules, had developed
as a military State, and her expansion, contrary to Britain, who like the
Americans had brought economic prosperity in the wake of their territorial
penetration, was carried out exclusively by an armed conquest, followed
by the ruin of the structure of any country under her occupation through
an excessive exploitation for the benefit of the central Power—Moscow.
Russia shapes her life only by her own experiences and has had no
use for any western culture, in fact, she is scared of its influence. The
Soviets of to-day, like the White Tsars of the past, are strictly isolating
their subjects from any contact with the world except through strongly
controlled governmental channels. It is a deeply-rooted and inherited
mistrust which can hardly be overcome, for not only is it embedded in the
soul of the rulers of the Russian Empire—Great Russians, but it forms
the basis of their very being. Soviet Communism with its idea of Moscow
as the centre of world power, has its roots in the Russian belief of the
Middle Ages that Moscow was to be the c third Rome * and the Great
Russians the ' chosen people.' So deeply embedded in the minds of the
Muscovite Tsars was the conviction of their messianic destiny that they
appointed themselves head of the Church and the Inquisition. To the
Tsars, toleration of heresy was associated with evil—in the era of the
Soviets, this heresy became the c Fascist evil,5 and they were to take upon
themselves the task of hunting this c evil * throughout the world by
' liberating 3 the peoples from their non-Communist governments . . .
It is an oft-repeated fallacy that the Soviet doctrines^ methods and
tactics appertain to modern times, and to attempt to trace their origin
from the creation of the All-Communist Party, or to the coming
of power of the Bolsheviks. Whereas, in order to understand Soviet
ethos and the underlying principles of their politics, the history of the
488